Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Black Ethics = / = Emotional ?

  1. #1
    thought criminal shotgunfingers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    ୧༼ಠ益ಠ╭∩╮༽
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    168 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Black Ethics = / = Emotional ?

    What do you guys make of this?:

    It is very important not to confuse Emotion with Black Ethics in socionics. Although the expression “ethics of emotions” used by many socionists is the word “emotion”, black ethics does not describe the emotional state of a person, but only determines the form of a person's perception of information. Black Ethics characterizes how we express and perceive reactions, not how we feel.
    Source: https://bestsocionics.com/psychosophy/first-emotion/

    I found this interesting.. does this mean being an ethical type does not necessarily imply being emotional? It kind of makes sense why some people who seem like logical types get classified as feelers in socionics.

    upon further reading.. thats weird, nothing about being emotional themselves. I have seen ppl who thought they were SLE get typed EIE-N before.. is this why?

    CHE - mental, boot, template, value

    EIE constantly keeps in mind the specific behavioral manifestations of the people around - speech features, gestures, facial expressions, words, and other reactions. In conversation, he colorfully describes them, often uses direct speech.

    It is very important for this type to see that people behave exactly the way they think is right. He feels stressed if someone breaks the rules of etiquette or does something unworthy, in his opinion. Because of this, he can easily aggravate relations or even break them off.

    Hamlet has clear, normative ideas about how to behave. From them, he repels when interacting with people and building relationships. His ideas about etiquette, rules of conduct may not coincide with generally accepted ones, but they will always be ordered and put on shelves.

    Information about what actions people do, what reactions they express, is very interesting for this type. He wants to talk about it, consume it, even if it is not necessary for life. Such information does not cause internal resistance.

    BE - vital, unloading, situational, non-value

    Hamlet has difficulty in vocalizing and revealing abstract ethical concepts such as friendship, love, morality, good, and evil. It is easier for him to explain what is good and what is bad, on concrete actions, discussing how should and how not to act. He also perceives information about people's relationships unconsciously, paying more attention to how people communicate with each other, what words they say to each other, and so on.

    EIE does not strive for stability of relations, it tends to decrease, then increase the distance in order to control the behavior of other people in this way. Changes in relationships do not cause stress in him, on the contrary, it is associated with something interesting, with leisure.

    Hamlet does not have a clear idea of ​​how to relate to what, how to evaluate certain phenomena. His own moral standards and values ​​are vague, vague, and often contrary to generally accepted ones, which can shock other people.

    Information about the qualities of people, about which values ​​and attitude to life are correct and which are not, causes internal resistance in this type. He does not want to discuss this information and consume it beyond what is necessary.
    EDIT: I read through other descriptions and yeah.. its all about a preference for observing information relating to this aspect (black ethics) in other people and taking action to "manipulate" it. e_e so not about being emotionally expressive.. interesting.

  2. #2
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,263
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think of the difference as follows....

    Fe - electric "yang" feeling
    Fi - magnetic "yin" feeling

    Both can influence. Just differently.
    Last edited by Aramas; 03-09-2021 at 11:59 PM.

  3. #3
    asd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    EII-C 4w5 sx/so
    Posts
    632
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    it sounds like they are just distinguishing between feeling emotions and Fe on a strict definitional level. But I would imagine ethical types probably find it easier to be in touch with their feelings, relatively speaking, and so in that sense they may be more "emotional"


  4. #4
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,263
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asd View Post
    it sounds like they are just distinguishing between feeling emotions and Fe on a strict definitional level. But I would imagine ethical types probably find it easier to be in touch with their feelings, relatively speaking, and so in that sense they may be more "emotional"
    Jung used the term "feeling" instead of ethics, and I feel that this term is more accurate. Fe DS can be really emotive. I think it's more that feelers have more control and precision.

    Feeling being in the unconscious mind means that they're also more subject to feelings rather than the master of their feelings.

    Socionics is inherently a logical construction, and trying to define feeling in terms of logic will always to some degree miss what feeling is. OP is right that feeling can be used to influence and control other people. But I think feelers in general also tend to be more empathetic. That's not to say that they aren't capable of hurting people. But they tend to more readily adapt themselves to others too.
    Last edited by Aramas; 03-10-2021 at 12:01 AM.

  5. #5
    thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,271
    Mentioned
    299 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Black ethics does not describe the emotional state of a person, but only determines the form of a person's perception of information. Black Ethics characterizes how we express and perceive reactions, not how we feel."

    This is a very brief description so I have to fill in some blanks to understand what they mean.

    I would say fundamentally, yes, Fe is about expression, not emotional states. And not only emotional expression but the communication of information of any kind. I realize this may be controversial but it is the best definition I have found, for numerous reasons.

    That isn't to say that it isn't also about emotional states. Clearly Fe leading types are concerned with how people are feeling and affecting their states via their expression. It's about the interaction between the expresser (the "performer") and those receiving the expression (the "audience"), or the individual and the group. But we must distinguish between what is fundamental (essential) and what is derived (accidental).

    "only determines the form of a person's perception of information"

    This is a common refrain in Russian texts, yet it seems to contradict the next sentence - expression is not a perception, it's an action. Action is absolutely fundamental to information metabolism, I cannot emphasize this enough.

  6. #6
    thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,271
    Mentioned
    299 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Their goal with saying this is to draw a line between socionics and psychosophy. Isn't it strange how psychosophy has so many terms in common with socionics? Why would that be? There are likely semantic differences but I find they are somewhat exaggerated.

  7. #7
    thought criminal shotgunfingers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    ୧༼ಠ益ಠ╭∩╮༽
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    168 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aramas View Post
    Jung used the term "feeling" instead of ethics, and I feel that this term is more accurate. Fe DS can be really emotive. I think it's more that feelers have more control and precision.

    Feeling being in the unconscious mind means that they're also more subject to feelings rather than the master of their feelings.

    Socionics is inherently a logical construction, and trying to define feeling in terms of logic will always to some degree miss what feeling is. OP is right that feeling can be used to influence and control other people. But I think feelers in general also tend to be more empathetic. That's not to say that they aren't capable of hurting people. But they tend to more readily adapt themselves to others too.
    from reading about ppl with Fe, I got the impression that they in order to achieve a certain reaction from others around them would act out what is required of them in order to manipulate (sounds bad but it doesn't have to be) a person or the crowd into the desired reaction.. but they themselves don't need to feel anything, its just an act to get the desired result. Now.. they CAN feel it and express that, but its not necessary. So I'm not saying they don't have feelings, just that Fe isn't about that.

    Its more like they can read other people or an entire crowd of people in this way (they understand and enjoy Fe information) and know exactly what to say and do to lets say rile them up, make people sad or induce the desired mood-state. This is the kind of person who knows exactly how to push other people's buttons or how to work a crowd.

    A lot of ppl considered EIE for example, such as Obama, MLK, Gitler were/are very good at this by default aka its their nature. It seems to be what makes them black ethics ego types. To a certain extent IF I really focus and train I can probably do something relatively close as I also naturally read people like this.. I'm just insecure about the application-phase and it isn't something that comes naturally to me and I prefer to be in the background not dealing with ppl. One to one however I notice I do something similar.. its a kind of chameleonic thing based on reading the other person and pushing just the right buttons to manipulate them into the desired mood-state.

  8. #8
    scientist donkey BrightDemonSheep96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On a toilet, right above you
    TIM
    ILE-H LEVF/omnibeta
    Posts
    6,349
    Mentioned
    267 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, as Jung stated it should be like this. Fe is much better at working with it. For instance we can usually see logical people being tormented by their emotions (usually Te types).
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

    Your life is too short to actually do anything useful with it without being wasteful.

  9. #9
    The Self is temporary but xSFxs are eternal one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Home
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fe leading types are not ignoring Fi for no reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by shotgunfingers View Post
    does this mean being an ethical type does not necessarily imply being emotional?
    Quote Originally Posted by Chin Diaper 007 View Post
    For instance we can usually see logical people being tormented by their emotions (usually Te types).
    Ime I'm way more emotional than Fe types, and more so compared to Fe egos. It's because there is a need to connect with others and realize personal sentiments but I'm dumb at it.
    Specially Alpha SFs as they tend to take emotions too lightly. Actually I don't even think they have too much of them in the first place. Their actions and behavior always seem to be inline with what the current mood is, at least that's how I perceive it.
    My ESE brother had a diary before, there's nothing there that could amount to poetry (you know what I mean).


    It kind of makes sense why some people who seem like logical types get classified as feelers in socionics
    I think you have a point here. Maybe Fi types are more obviously feelers, but Fe types can be easily perceived as thinkers sometimes. I said that Fi types are obviously feelers because of this tendency of theirs to share inner emotions to connect with others.

    They value sensitivity to others' feelings, and occasionally will make their innermost feelings and sentiments known in order to test the possibility of creating closeness with others.
    Also, these types convey emotions in terms of how they were affected by something (such as "I did not like that"), rather than an extroverted ethics (Fe) approach that would describe the object itself without clear reference to the subject involved (such as "That sucked"). Much of their decisions are based on how they themselves, or others in relation to them personally, feel in contrast to considering how "the big picture" is affected (such as groups of people).
    - sociotype.com
    R

  10. #10
    thought criminal shotgunfingers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    ୧༼ಠ益ಠ╭∩╮༽
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    168 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by one View Post
    I think you have a point here. Maybe Fi types are more obviously feelers, but Fe types can be easily perceived as thinkers sometimes. I said that Fi types are obviously feelers because of this tendency of theirs to share inner emotions to connect with others.
    yeah, that is an attempt to create a relationship based on commonality / shared experience, so Fi. Even here tho feelings are more of a tool for Fi than what Fi is as a information element. They may come hand in hand but Fi isn't emotions either.

  11. #11
    The Self is temporary but xSFxs are eternal one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Home
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shotgunfingers View Post
    yeah, that is an attempt to create a relationship based on commonality / shared experience, so Fi. Even here tho feelings are more of a tool for Fi than what Fi is as a information element. They may come hand in hand but Fi isn't emotions either.
    Yes, everyone feels emotions at some point. It's not from a specific IE, though Fe and Fi make use of emotions.
    R

  12. #12
    scientist donkey BrightDemonSheep96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On a toilet, right above you
    TIM
    ILE-H LEVF/omnibeta
    Posts
    6,349
    Mentioned
    267 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by one View Post
    Fe leading types are not ignoring Fi for no reason.



    Ime I'm way more emotional than Fe types, and more so compared to Fe egos. It's because there is a need to connect with others and realize personal sentiments but I'm dumb at it.
    Specially Alpha SFs as they tend to take emotions too lightly. Actually I don't even think they have too much of them in the first place. Their actions and behavior always seem to be inline with what the current mood is, at least that's how I perceive it.
    My ESE brother had a diary before, there's nothing there that could amount to poetry (you know what I mean).



    I think you have a point here. Maybe Fi types are more obviously feelers, but Fe types can be easily perceived as thinkers sometimes. I said that Fi types are obviously feelers because of this tendency of theirs to share inner emotions to connect with others.

    - sociotype.com
    I usually see it as opposite. I see it as practical handholding because they can not connect links that could generate something you live for and not drop dead. ILI few days ago viewed life as a sentence that he has to carry and so on. Seems like a good way to identify Fi valuer.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

    Your life is too short to actually do anything useful with it without being wasteful.

  13. #13
    The Self is temporary but xSFxs are eternal one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Home
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chin Diaper 007 View Post
    I usually see it as opposite. I see it as practical handholding because they can not connect links that could generate something you live for and not drop dead.
    Which part are you referring to? I may have said a lot of things there
    Lmao every time I refresh your post extends, I wonder if I should refresh again
    R

  14. #14
    scientist donkey BrightDemonSheep96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On a toilet, right above you
    TIM
    ILE-H LEVF/omnibeta
    Posts
    6,349
    Mentioned
    267 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    It is just that Fe is like colorful life while Fi dunno... I need and want and connect but I can't squeeze. That said I kind of squeeze very pointy logical thingys.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

    Your life is too short to actually do anything useful with it without being wasteful.

  15. #15
    Cool it with the anti-Grenitic remarks bucko! Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    B I T C H
    Posts
    2,198
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Vage, Vague, n' Vagguey

  16. #16
    💩 Nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    TIM
    POOP™
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    Vage, Vague, n' Vagguey
    Black is not black; you must understand. Do you not consider, you can not escape?
    Quote Originally Posted by Aramas View Post
    Just rename this place Beta Central lmao
    Quote Originally Posted by MidnightWilderness View Post
    The only problem socionics has given me is a propensity to analyze every relationship from the lens of socionics and I also see that it is worse in my boyfriend. Nothing makes any sense that way and it does not really solve any problems.





  17. #17
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    123
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    At a basic level, black ethics is about nothing more and nothing less than the ability to perceive and generate energetic/emotional implications on objects (taking the object as anything, for example a painting, a car, a piece of architecture or the facial emotional expression of a person).
    If you go deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole of Russian socionism, you will find that for a long time socionics has been distancing itself from superficial personality. I assume this is because firstly, socionics is sometimes presented and studied at academic levels in eastern europe, and secondly, more individuals and companies of eastern europe hire socionics practitioners, which gives more room for comparison, testing the theory agains't reality and practical evidence, and investigation.

    In a lot of westerners minds, socionics is a more serious version of the MBTI, this is especially evident in their exaggerated and unrealistic over-behavioralist interpretation. Add to that that half of the users of this forum are as dense as tubercles (some diagnose sociotypes depending on the model of car the diagnosed use, others by haircut and others link Jungian typology with astrology in a serious way... some do all of that at once) and you have all the answers that you can get to the question.
    Last edited by RBRS; 03-11-2021 at 11:02 PM.

  18. #18
    The Self is temporary but xSFxs are eternal one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Home
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chin Diaper 007 View Post
    It is just that Fe is like colorful life while Fi dunno... I need and want and connect but I can't squeeze. That said I kind of squeeze very pointy logical thingys.
    You cannot squeeze pointy things from them (not that I want to squeeze anything of that sort from them anyway). I guess this is a part of why I think they are obviously feelers.
    Fe feels robotic to me, colorful only on the surface. I always fear that it's just a matter of time when they would throw me under the bus once I don't fit in anymore or provide the pointy things you speak of. (This is tainted by my experience obviously, not saying they are objectively robotic and disloyal)
    R

  19. #19
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    ref to ptr to self
    Posts
    1,960
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Depends on who you talk to, but in system socionics-type views, this is how I've always read it. It's where the "information" part of information aspect comes in.

  20. #20
    mfckrz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    TIM
    LIE-Ni 8w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shotgunfingers View Post
    I found this interesting.. does this mean being an ethical type does not necessarily imply being emotional? It kind of makes sense why some people who seem like logical types get classified as feelers in socionics.

    upon further reading.. thats weird, nothing about being emotional themselves. I have seen ppl who thought they were SLE get typed EIE-N before.. is this why?
    I'd say emotions are general to everyone, but the extent to which emotion is intensively or extensively operationalized differs between types.

    As a rule of course, Fe is going to be more extensive—i.e. more visibly emotive. Whereas an Fi base might be intensively moody yet remain outwardly stoic as if nothing is occurring within.

    EIE tends to instrumentalize emotion and apply it tactically towards desired ends. If you get them to open up and explain their mentations to you, they'll often describe themselves as being amorally detached from what they're doing. Which might seem insincere—particularly to Fi-valuing types—but usually isn't. They're just pragmatic about emotional cause-effect akin to how Te is re: material cause-effect.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    12,775
    Mentioned
    1178 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shotgunfingers View Post
    What do you guys make of this?
    About types is better to read Jung and Augustunavichiute. All what is useful for a typing fits there still.
    What contradicts to types basics alike "Fe is not about feelings" mb ignored.

    F is about emotions.
    Fe is about objective emotional state (general energy level) and objective emotional value (for anyone).
    Fi is about subjective emotional state (pleasure/suffering) and subjective/personal emotional relation/value (perception of concrete human).

    For example:
    Fe - apples are good.
    Fi - I like apples.
    Fe - he's feeling badly.
    Fi - he's upset by something.

    Emotions is an energy for actions, a side of a motivation.

    > its all about a preference for observing information relating to this aspect (black ethics) in other people and taking action to "manipulate" it. so not about being emotionally expressive

    Jung type is about dominating contents in a consciousness. Externally seen behavior (including nonverbal) is secondary to what happens in the consciousness, indeed. But it's doubtful to have F type and be lesser than average emotionally expressive. Not what will be for very majority of people with F type, at least. For rare cases, it's possibly to assume existence of external factors which may significantly reduce nonverbal behavior related to F types as meds, special training, etc.
    F types (Fe and Fi) have dominating in the consciousness the info about emotions, they are mostly concentrated on feelings and are mostly motivated by them too. Concentrated on emotions in general, own and of other people. Actions to influence on emotions and how emotions influece on actions are interesting for them too. If you see something and think about it, hence you think how to deal with it.
    If you are concentrated on own emotions much, so you'll express them more too. And with the understanding how to influence on own and other people by emotions, you'll use them more also. So F types are seen as emotional people, more than average emotionally expressive.

    When you see strange theory views as F is not about emotionality or that F is only about emotions of other people but not your own or that to influence on emotions of other people own emotional expressiveness is not main (or not important) way - the common the task of such nonsense is to rationalize typing mistakes which are often.
    F types are significantly more emotional (including in externally seen behavior) than T types and than people in average level. Such is for the majority of people, at least. External factors besides Jung types may influence on types related behavior too, sometimes influence strongly.

    -

    I know a girl which thinks herself as non-emotional or emotionally cold. While in my perception she's emotional human. She also has more interest to concrete people as persons and their relations. And worse in thinking than could according to study results. I typed her to F type. About a half of forum's noobs typed her to T type after she became inclined to T. So some people may perceive her as cold too. May be when compare with themselves or when value other kind of F or else.
    This case mb related to external factors which predispose her to try supress external emotional expression or emotions in general. So her F type mb lesser noticed. She may suppress emotions when those are bad, for example. While bad emotions she may to have higher than average from different problems, to be emotionally tender. Though for me she's emotional with all that "coldness" and suppressions. I may compare with myself in how I think and talk, how I'm more limited in nonverbal expressiveness. She's significantly different in emotionality which can be seen externally. Different enough so I type her as F type.
    Last edited by Sol; 03-12-2021 at 01:16 PM.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  22. #22
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    ILI INTp
    Posts
    724
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, there's two kinds of people, those who generally get angry, and those who generally don't. Ironically, EIE has better control of themselves than LSI or SLE, and it has to do with lack of Fi, which is emotional control. EIE can act crazy, but is generally stolid from my understanding. Especially if EIE is Bowie, which honestly is unlikely, but that's what I was told.

    But yeah, all people get angry. It's just how and why. I'm incredibly averse to following my passions, so it happens in the heat of the moment, and I'm likely to be sad for 30 minutes first before I decide it is justifiable to get angry. I'll figure it out eventually.

    But yeah, I generally don't get angry so I'm not used to it. INTP. This one guy I know seems to drop at a pin. He generally does get angry. Probably ESTp. This third guy gets blind unconcious rage, ironically, he is not used to being angry, and it's like a switch for him, and he loses control. Probably ISFj

    I haven't seen LII get angry. I have seen ESFp interpret the grumbles of LII as rage, but I have not seen objective anger.

    SEE himself actively gets pissy over small stupid things, which I or someone else then fixes. Works okay.

    As such, my conclusion is if it was related to something, probably Se or Ti. Note that anger does not mean violence, it just means anger, which is a method of acting out on frustration. Anger is a surface emotion, and if you treat the cause at the root, no anger. Learned that from a psych place.
    Last edited by Alomoes; 03-12-2021 at 02:08 PM.

  23. #23
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    123
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    About types is better to read Jung and Augustunavichiute. All what is useful for a typing fits there still.
    What contradicts to types basics alike "Fe is not about feelings" mb ignored.

    F is about emotions.
    Fe is about objective emotional state (general energy level) and objective emotional value (for anyone).
    Fi is about subjective emotional state (pleasure/suffering) and subjective/personal emotional relation/value (perception of concrete human).

    For example:
    Fe - apples are good.
    Fi - I like apples.
    Fe - he's feeling badly.
    Fi - he's upset by something.

    Emotions is an energy for actions, a side of a motivation.

    > its all about a preference for observing information relating to this aspect (black ethics) in other people and taking action to "manipulate" it. so not about being emotionally expressive

    Jung type is about dominating contents in a consciousness. Externally seen behavior (including nonverbal) is secondary to what happens in the consciousness, indeed. But it's doubtful to have F type and be lesser than average emotionally expressive. Not what will be for very majority of people with F type, at least. For rare cases, it's possibly to assume existence of external factors which may significantly reduce nonverbal behavior related to F types as meds, special training, etc.
    F types (Fe and Fi) have dominating in the consciousness the info about emotions, they are mostly concentrated on feelings and are mostly motivated by them too. Concentrated on emotions in general, own and of other people. Actions to influence on emotions and how emotions influece on actions are interesting for them too. If you see something and think about it, hence you think how to deal with it.
    If you are concentrated on own emotions much, so you'll express them more too. And with the understanding how to influence on own and other people by emotions, you'll use them more also. So F types are seen as emotional people, more than average emotionally expressive.

    When you see strange theory views as F is not about emotionality or that F is only about emotions of other people but not your own or that to influence on emotions of other people own emotional expressiveness is not main (or not important) way - the common the task of such nonsense is to rationalize typing mistakes which are often.
    F types are significantly more emotional (including in externally seen behavior) than T types and than people in average level. Such is for the majority of people, at least. External factors besides Jung types may influence on types related behavior too, sometimes influence strongly.

    -

    I know a girl which thinks herself as non-emotional or emotionally cold. While in my perception she's emotional human. She also has more interest to concrete people as persons and their relations. And worse in thinking than could according to study results. I typed her to F type. About a half of forum's noobs typed her to T type after she became inclined to T. So some people may perceive her as cold too. May be when compare with themselves or when value other kind of F or else.
    This case mb related to external factors which predispose her to try supress external emotional expression or emotions in general. So her F type mb lesser noticed. She may suppress emotions when those are bad, for example. While bad emotions she may to have higher than average from different problems, to be emotionally tender. Though for me she's emotional with all that "coldness" and suppressions. I may compare with myself in how I think and talk, how I'm more limited in nonverbal expressiveness. She's significantly different in emotionality which can be seen externally. Different enough so I type her as F type.
    The norm in human societies is alterations and external conditions that give way to unnatural behaviors that can be associated with certain information elements from culture, family, small community, etc. Following that line of thought, the average person is in a certain shape astray from his original natural inclinations and presents culturally or socially (As from family) imprinted behaviors that could be associated by socionist as belonging to certain types or IMs. If that wasn't enough undiagnosed or diagnosed mental alterations usually have a huge impact on behavior. It is estimated that at least 10% of the world's population has a mental disorder, and 20% of children and teenagers also do.
    Assuming superficial type behaviors to be specifically indicative of definite typings is evidently not the best way towards correct diagnosis, thus the best option is to not associate behavioral traits or preferences with sociotypes, and treat such things as separate.
    Last edited by RBRS; 03-12-2021 at 06:27 PM.

  24. #24
    thought criminal shotgunfingers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    ୧༼ಠ益ಠ╭∩╮༽
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    168 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alomoes View Post
    Well, there's two kinds of people, those who generally get angry, and those who generally don't. Ironically, EIE has better control of themselves than LSI or SLE, and it has to do with lack of Fi, which is emotional control. EIE can act crazy, but is generally stolid from my understanding. Especially if EIE is Bowie, which honestly is unlikely, but that's what I was told.

    But yeah, all people get angry. It's just how and why. I'm incredibly averse to following my passions, so it happens in the heat of the moment, and I'm likely to be sad for 30 minutes first before I decide it is justifiable to get angry. I'll figure it out eventually.

    But yeah, I generally don't get angry so I'm not used to it. INTP. This one guy I know seems to drop at a pin. He generally does get angry. Probably ESTp. This third guy gets blind unconcious rage, ironically, he is not used to being angry, and it's like a switch for him, and he loses control. Probably ISFj

    I haven't seen LII get angry. I have seen ESFp interpret the grumbles of LII as rage, but I have not seen objective anger.

    SEE himself actively gets pissy over small stupid things, which I or someone else then fixes. Works okay.

    As such, my conclusion is if it was related to something, probably Se or Ti. Note that anger does not mean violence, it just means anger, which is a method of acting out on frustration. Anger is a surface emotion, and if you treat the cause at the root, no anger. Learned that from a psych place.
    me when on a 6 game losing streak in League, rip keyboard:


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •